Two
leaders face off in a hotly contested election race, one which
will determine the fate of their nation. One is a leftist
liberal, entrenched in power, relying on a police apparatus
and propaganda; the other a conservative, enjoying an advantage
in funding and promising to restore dignity to office of the
president. There is a vote. But the results are contested,
ballots are miscounted, and the Supreme Court intervenes to
resolve the election. United States, December 2000? Try Yugoslavia,
this September.

Slobodan
Milosevic’s government claimed the election was too close
to call. The opposition protested, claiming outright victory.
While Vojislav Kostunica was offering a recount ("Goodwill
gesture" from Yugoslav opposition could end impasse,
AFP, 29. September 2000), Milosevic was insisting on holding
a runoff election. When Zoran Djindjic and his cohorts running
Kostunica’s campaign refused to consider such an option, the
Yugoslav constitutional court (US Supreme Court’s counterpart)
annulled the election results (see NY Times, "Belgrade
Court Annuls Vote That Was Milosevic Setback" by Steven
Erlanger, 10/5/2000). This provoked a demonstration in front
of the parliament that led to the overthrow of Milosevic and
the inauguration of Kostunica as Yugoslav president.

On
the face of it, the similarities are eerie. Knowing that the
United States was deeply involved in this chain of events,
they become downright sinister.

MANIPULATORS

A
week before the elections in Yugoslavia, a NATO naval expeditionary
force was moored off the Yugoslav coast; the US-funded Montenegrin
regime boycotted the election; and Madeleine Albright asserted
that the vote would be "stolen" weeks before any
ballots were actually cast. Then the Washington Post
ran a front-page story detailing the "$77 million U.S.
effort to do with ballots what NATO bombs could not 
get rid of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic" [US
Funds Help Milosevic’s Foes in Election Fight, John Lancaster,
9/19/2000, A01] .

Kostunica
promptly denounced the US for meddling, but his convincing
lead quickly melted away. As Milosevic thundered against "traitors
and foreign mercenaries," the Post just about
admitted his allegations were true!

Four
days later, Jane Perlez wrote in the New York Times:
"Even if, as almost everyone expects, Mr. Milosevic simply
declares himself the victor, Washington is hoping that angry
voters will take to the streets in a way that eventually drives
him from office, much as Ferdinand E. Marcos was ousted in
the Philippines in 1986." (US Anti-Milosevic Plan
Faces Major Test at Polls, September 23). When the masses
did exactly that on October 5, everyone seemed surprised.
Soon thereafter, Kostunica’s coalition partners began boasting
how they had planned a violent overthrow of Milosevic. Was
it just them?

No,
according to the Washington Post. This Monday, amidst
the US electoral controversy, the Post published another
report, detailing how the United States planned, funded
and ran the campaign against Milosevic this past fall.

CONSPIRACY
REVEALED

Michael
Dobbs, author of the article, claims that Americans and US-paid
consultants crafted the strategy to vote Milosevic out of
office; that retired military officers taught Otpor activists
how to organize demonstrations; that US taxpayers funded 5,000
cans of spray paint used to scrawl opposition graffiti across
Serbia; that President Clinton’s own pollsters – Penn, Schoen
& Berland Associates, Inc. – were involved in crafting
pro-opposition polls before the election.

It
is startling and sickening to read how the US operatives exploited
Milosevic’s greatest weakness – his soft spot for the democratic
process. Says the Post,

"Had
Yugoslavia been a totalitarian state like Iraq or North
Korea, the strategy would have stood little chance. But
while Milosevic ran a repressive police state, he was never
a dictator in the style of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
His authority depended on a veil of popular legitimacy.
It was this constitutional facade that gave Serbian opposition
leaders, and their Western backers, an all-important opening."

Milosevic’s
greatest weakness was that he was not ruthless enough? Such
a supreme irony, indeed, especially when coming from the same
media house that has denounced Milosevic as another Hitler
and gleefully published editorials advocating the complete
destruction of Serbia during the 1999 war.

A
NEW KIND OF COVERT OP

The
September 19 article described US meddling in Yugoslav elections
as "similar to previous campaigns in pre-democratic Chile,
South Africa and Eastern Europe." But Dobbs dwells on
"extraordinary US effort to unseat a foreign head of
state, not through covert action of the kind the CIA once
employed in such places as Iran and Guatemala, but by modern
election campaign techniques."

None
of the countries and regions described above have profited
from US involvement. Quite to the contrary, it had profoundly
negative consequences. Guatemala plunged into a 20-year, bloody
civil war. In Iran, oppression of the people by the American-dominated
regime spawned the Islamic revolution. South Africa and Eastern
Europe have seen their state institutions disintegrate, and
have plunged into abject poverty. In Chile, US-backed dictatorship
of Augusto Pinochet was responsible for numerous crimes against
its citizens.

Based
on this record, extensive American involvement in Yugoslav
and Serbian elections ought to cause every freedom-loving
human being to cringe with disgust. By definition, it flies
in the face of everything that has ever been said about democracy,
responsibility, freedom of choice and international law –
to mention just a few major points.

The
US government may argue that its meddling helped the Serbs.
The jury is still out on whether Kostunica’s presidency has
made things better, though. International recognition is hardly
a compensation for famine, economic collapse and fuel shortages
that have descended on Serbia after Milosevic’s fall. Kostunica’s
election may yet prove to be a beneficial development for
the Serbs, plagued as they have been by ill fortune throughout
the 20th century. But that would come in
spite of Washington’s plots, not because of them.

Nebojsa
Malich left his home in Bosnia after the Dayton Accords and
currently resides in the United States. During the Bosnian
War he had exposure to diplomatic and media affairs in Sarajevo,
and had contributed to the Independent. As a historian who
specialized in international relations and the Balkans, Malich
has written numerous essays on the Kosovo War, Bosnia and
Serbian politics, which were published by the Serbian
Unity Congress. His exclusive column for Antiwar.com appears
every Thursday.

TIMED
FALLOUT

Those
who consider Kostunica a US puppet have a hard time proving
their case. Though not exactly hostile, he is certainly no
big friend of Washington. His government has hardly been a
pushover, though it has been very flexible on many issues
Milosevic refused to yield ground over the years – such as
the UN
membership, Yugoslav succession and,
to
an extent, war crimes.

If
he really were a US puppet, how would one explain the persistent
secessionism of Djukanovic’s regime in Podgorica, or the ambivalenceof NATO in face of the Albanian invasion of southern
Serbia? Kostunica’s party has supported
the Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) in Bosnia, which the US
is endeavoring
to ban even though it won the elections there fair and
square. Kostunica has also insisted on territorial integrity
of Serbia and Yugoslavia, while the US has supportedseparatist demands of its clients in Kosovo and Montenegro,
even whilepublicly
claiming otherwise.

There
are, however, leaders in Kostunica’s motley coalition that
are more inclined to serve foreign interests. Every nation
has its share of traitors and sellouts, and it is their direction
one needs to look when following the US money trail and the
conspicuous interference in Yugoslav and Serbian affairs.

Conspicuous
is the key word here. The timing of this article’s publication
cannot be an accident. Even in its imperious arrogance, the
mainstream American press would never dare publicly announce
its government’s machinations in Yugoslavia if doing so would
hurt the efforts of Washington oligarchs. It certainly marched
in lockstep with the government during American-led terror
bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.

The
Washington Post’s September 19 article gave credence
to Milosevic’s claims of foreign interference and hurt Kostunica’s
coalition just a week before the federal elections. Soon after
Kostunica took over on October 5, as he was trying to establish
legitimacy and convince the people he was not a stooge of
NATO, US papers and politicians started claiming credit for
his success, praising the policies of bombing, sanctions and
separatism – along with propaganda and "democratization"
projects such as those detailed in the Post – as being
the real reason for Milosevic’s fall.

The
newest article detailing the intricacies of the American conspiracy
– for how else would one call such a degree of tampering in
another country’s elections? – again comes at the worst possible
time for Kostunica. Albanian bandits have invaded southern
Serbia, Yugoslavia’s economy is tanking fast, and Zoran Djindjic
seems poised to sweep the December elections and pull the
rug out from under Kostunica’s feet.

TAKING
SIDES

Indeed,
though the December elections are described as the clash of
Kostunica’s DOS and the remnants of Milosevic’s Socialists,
the real power struggle will be between factions within DOS
– Kostunica and Djindjic.

The
Post then dumps a cauldron of investigative pitch on
the heads of all involved, eroding Kostunica’s legitimacy
and deriding the efforts of the opposition (now government)
in changing the politics of Serbia. One is tempted to wonder
if Washington wants Kostunica to fail, or at least to be sufficiently
weakened to submit to US demands.

A
WRENCH IN THE WORKS

Kostunica
may be too American for the Empire’s comfort. He actually
believesin the constitution, rights and liberties, limited
government, patriotism and sovereignty – all issues the current
regime in Washington has undermined or sidelined over the
past eight years.

If
the December 11 article was truthful – which seems likely
– then it represents an irrefutable proof that there really
was a US plan to overthrow Milosevic and install a friendlier
regime, dominated by pro-American politicians. Kostunica might
have fit into the plan as a figurehead, intended to be replaced
by Djindjic or someone else when the time was ripe.

Apparently
no one told him that, since Kostunica went on to become a
true statesman and garner tremendous support among the people.
His strength now surpasses that of Djindjic’s party, so much
that Djindjic needs Kostunica’s support to become Serbia’s
Prime Minister after the elections in late December. Hence
comes the need to take Kostunica down a peg an attack his
honesty, integrity and independence, effectively propping
up Djindjic’s power grab. So the Post says:

"To
many opposition activists, Kostunica’s denials ring a little
hollow. While it is true that his own party, the Democratic
Party of Serbia, rejected anything that smacked of US aid,
his presidential campaign benefited enormously from the
advice and financial support the opposition coalition received
from abroad, and particularly from the United States."

SECRETS,
BARGAINS AND LIES

Though
the full fallout from the Post’s article will only
be known in the coming days, one of its unintended consequences
was to expose the extent of America’s illegal imperial adventures.
Now that it is known the US was so deeply involved in Milosevic’s
overthrow, maybe other secrets will also emerge – such as
its exact role in the events of October 5, and the extent
to which Kostunica’s peaceful takeover and Milosevic’s concession
were or were not a part of that plan. Perhaps some day soon,
the American public – and the Serbian public as well – will
find out what the puppet masters had in mind, and which actors
were (or were not) their puppets.

BOOMERANG

The
penultimate irony, of course, is that the US found itself
mired in a similar situation just two months later. Could
the ballot manipulation in Florida be the consequence of similar
practices abroad? The temptation to use the ways and means
of empire-building at home are great, especially when the
prize is the Empire itself.

But
let us be realistic. It is hard to envision masses of angry
Americans charging Capitol Hill of the White House and inaugurating
the candidate they consider the victor, or the US Supreme
Court annulling the election. Alas, neither of the US candidates
has the integrity of Vojislav Kostunica or the ruthless political
savvy and charm of Slobodan Milosevic. There won’t be any
bulldozers on the streets of Washington any time soon, and
more’s the pity.

Please
Support Antiwar.com

A
contribution of $50 or more will get you a copy of Ronald
Radosh's out-of-print classic study of the Old Right conservatives,
Prophets on the Right: Profiles of Conservative Critics
of American Globalism. Send contributions to